IcePath icepath.io · Hockey Analytics
← New Search ↗ Social Card

Matthew Peca Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1993-04-27 Country: Canada
No commitment set

Set Commitment

NCAA Division I

NCAA D3 / D2

Career Trajectory
Dashed = raw PPG  ·  ■ Solid blue = age-adjusted NCAAe-PPG  ·  ■ Green = actual college PPG
Junior Seasons
Season Team League GP G A Pts PPG NCAAe-PPG Age-Adj D3e-PPG Age-Adj
2009-10 Pembroke Lumber Kings CCHL 60 21 26 47 0.783 0.2501 0.2773 0.6064 0.6723
2010-11 Pembroke Lumber Kings CCHL 50 26 46 72 1.440 0.4598 0.4870 1.1147 1.1807
■ Blue = NCAAe (D1 anchor)   ■ Green = D3e (D3 anchor)   COVID-flagged seasons highlighted in yellow
College Seasons (Historical)
Season School Div Conference Year GP G A Pts PPG
2014-15 Quinnipiac D1 ECAC SR 39 7 29 36 0.923
2013-14 Quinnipiac D1 ECAC JR 40 12 26 38 0.950
2012-13 Quinnipiac D1 ECAC SO 39 15 15 30 0.769
2011-12 Quinnipiac D1 — FR 39 8 31 39 1.000
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.35
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
1.00
2011-12 · Quinnipiac
+189.8% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#10190
Forward overall
#383
Forward born in 1993
#110
in CCHL

D1 Comparables

Sean Malone
NTDP-U18 · 2012-13 · 0.66 PPG
→ Harvard (0.65 D1 FR PPG)
0.50 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Matthew Weis
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.71 PPG
→ Ohio State (0.67 D1 FR PPG)
0.46 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Gabe Guertler
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.85 PPG
→ Minnesota (0.21 D1 FR PPG)
0.55 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Tyler Motte
NTDP-U18 · 2012-13 · 0.67 PPG
→ Michigan (0.53 D1 FR PPG)
0.50 Average
NCAAe PPG
John Hayden
NTDP-U18 · 2012-13 · 0.64 PPG
→ Yale (0.48 D1 FR PPG)
0.48 Average
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Luke Moodie
SUNY Oswego · 2005-06
0.926 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
John Barrett
Wilkes · 2016-17
0.000 No data
actual D2/3 PPG
Taylor McCloy
Adrian · 2011-12
1.500 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG

How to read this: NCAAe and D3e factors convert a player's junior PPG into expected NCAA scoring at the D1 or D3 level. Harder conferences → lower projected PPG for the same player. A strong junior player (e.g. USHL 0.90 PPG) will project much higher in NESCAC than Big Ten because the D3 scoring environment is lower-difficulty.

Strength factor: conferences above 1.0 are harder than average; below 1.0 are easier. The formula is: Base NCAAe PPG ÷ Conference Strength = Projected PPG.